The past few years in Blackie Cove I've seen an uproar in wake-setter boats. These types of boats are a little more expensive for their size. They are made to make high waves for the Skiers, and Wake boarders.

These boats are causing erosion to our shores, and over the past 4th or July week, we needed to fix our dock several times. These boats shouldn't be used for leisure in this Cove.

The Cove is good for skiing, but it is causing erosion and fraying the ropes that connect the boats to the dock.

Having other boats like Four Winds, Glastrons, Crownlines, and Pontoons are good for the use of Skiing, and tubing, etc, would be better for this Cove.

Blackie Cove is very thin and the Wakesetter waves have no time to settle down before hitting the shores. Coves that are probably having the same problem are Salmon Meadow, and Center Harbor. Other places include thin Channels.

You are not the only one experiencing problems. We also have had broken mooring whips and dock lines snapped. And erosion is a real problem. We just learn to live with it over the 15 +/- weekends and pay to fix things as they break. Just part of the deal, as they have the right to use the lake like all of us. But since they like all the waves, wonder why they cannot do this in other areas of more open water.

First, we had to deal with the noisy "drag boats". Outlawed. Remember years ago when "we" started petitioning to stop jet skis in many coves? Then jet skis got bigger and were boats and "we" passed NWZ's for coves, then large areas like Meredith Bay. Then we passed whole lake speed limits and noise restrictions. And look at the progression of NRZ and all the restrictions on anchoring that don't exist elsewhere.
Isn't it ironic that NH, Winni in particular, the LFOD state, has more rules than anybody except maybe Lake George?

In "your" cove is it neighbors who are boarding? Or boaters from elsewhere?
If you and maybe a couple of friends get in your canoes and go out in the cove and drop a fish line, you just created a 300' diameter NWZ. If it's outside boaters, they'll find another spot to make waves. If it's your neighbors, maybe you'll all get together and find a way to share the cove and minimize erosion. But please, no more new laws.

Thanks for bringing up this important issue, Dante. It's a problem even in larger bays. The erosion issue is a serious risk--more erosion means more phosphorous in the water, which leads to more plant growth, which leads to less lake for all.

Wake-setters, like extra load and extra fast boats, should be regulated. Though none of us enjoy being regulated, it's not right to let a small number of extreme boats cause disproportionate disruption.

First, we had to deal with the noisy "drag boats". Outlawed. Remember years ago when "we" started petitioning to stop jet skis in many coves? Then jet skis got bigger and were boats and "we" passed NWZ's for coves, then large areas like Meredith Bay. Then we passed whole lake speed limits and noise restrictions. And look at the progression of NRZ and all the restrictions on anchoring that don't exist elsewhere.
Isn't it ironic that NH, Winni in particular, the LFOD state, has more rules than anybody except maybe Lake George?

In "your" cove is it neighbors who are boarding? Or boaters from elsewhere?
If you and maybe a couple of friends get in your canoes and go out in the cove and drop a fish line, you just created a 300' diameter NWZ. If it's outside boaters, they'll find another spot to make waves. If it's your neighbors, maybe you'll all get together and find a way to share the cove and minimize erosion. But please, no more new laws.

To my knowledge, the wave-setters are exclusively from OUTSIDE the cove. We see them all coming in. None are owned by people in the cove. And where is DES that regulates everything....but they do nothing about shoreline erosion from these boats?? Where is "Shore things" when she is needed ????

Thanks for bringing up this important issue, Dante. It's a problem even in larger bays. The erosion issue is a serious risk--more erosion means more phosphorous in the water, which leads to more plant growth, which leads to less lake for all.

Wake-setters, like extra load and extra fast boats, should be regulated. Though none of us enjoy being regulated, it's not right to let a small number of extreme boats cause disproportionate disruption.

The past few years in Blackie Cove I've seen an uproar in wake-setter boats. These types of boats are a little more expensive for their size. They are made to make high waves for the Skiers, and Wake boarders.

These boats are causing erosion to our shores, and over the past 4th or July week, we needed to fix our dock several times. These boats shouldn't be used for leisure in this Cove.

The Cove is good for skiing, but it is causing erosion and fraying the ropes that connect the boats to the dock.

Having other boats like Four Winds, Glastrons, Crownlines, and Pontoons are good for the use of Skiing, and tubing, etc, would be better for this Cove.

Blackie Cove is very thin and the Wakesetter waves have no time to settle down before hitting the shores. Coves that are probably having the same problem are Salmon Meadow, and Center Harbor. Other places include thin Channels.

If you didn't know what a wake-setter is, here is a picture

If anyone else is having the same issue as me, post your issue.

THE Wake setters boats you call is ever boat on the lake.WAVES travel miles
you look at your boat in the cove ,

Build a seawall and be done with it if your that concerned ! the end.......

Seawalls lead to erosion at the neighboring lots.

In my locale, I've seen only one seawall. It's possible that they're not permitted. Lakes with many seawalls cause even greater wake damage—plus wakes tend to be returned even larger.

Lake of the Ozarks (LOTO) had a 26' cruiser sunk by a following wake, drowning a woman passenger. LOTO allows seawalls.

Today, I watched a wake-setter boat. Its wake settled down to nothing while the boat went in a straight line. A subsequent curve in the line raised a large and curling wake that did make its way to crash ashore.

For the last decade, we rented a house every summer in Blackey Cove. The house sold last year, we will miss it dearly, it's a wonderful location on the lake and I deeply envy each of you that have a home there.

In the past, the cove was/is used heavily for wakeboarding and skiing, even tubing and some of those waves were definitely impressive on their own. I stopped tubing in there myself, and try to make sure when we board I stay as much to the middle as I can (hard to do if more than one person is trying to used ).

However, the last 2 years we were there, I do admit, the boats set up for wakesurfing (and I'm certain one of those boats is new, and lives in the cove) were doing a NUMBER on the boat and the dock I used. Had to adjust the dock a few times during my rental. Those setups do throw off an impressive wake, similar to some of the bigger cruisers at maximum plowing speed.

If I lived in there, I'd definitely be looking at what I could do to shore up my dock, get my boat on a lift or at least some whips to protect it. I'm not sure what else you can do. While there are a fair share of 150' violations (it's a small cove...), the actual wake and how they are using the boat is not illegal.

Just a sign of the times, maybe slolam skiing will become popular again and the minimal wake boats will make a resurgence.

This would seem to ignore the laws of physics. Can you explain or provide data? I have searched and found nothing.

You piqued my curiosity--reflected waves certainly certainly seem to make things worse for boats on the lake on a busy weekend. But yeah, we all know a wall can't magnify an individual wake. Here's a great explanation from ClimatetechWiki that bridges the gap:

Smooth, vertical seawalls are the least effective at dissipating wave energy; instead, the structures reflect wave energy seawards. Reflection creates turbulence, capable of suspending sediments (Bush et al., 2004), thus making them more susceptible to erosion. In a worst-case scenario, reflected energy can interact with incoming waves to set up a standing wave which causes intense scouring of the shoreline (French, 2001).

It's those damn "standing waves"!

Here's the link with pluses and minuses of seawalls and full references:

The past few years at the Village Kitchen I've seen [a loud and impassioned noise or disturbance] in Tag Heuer watches. These types of watches are a little more expensive for their size. They are made to tell accurate time for the for humans, and horses.

These watches are causing blinding glares from across the room, and over the past 4th or July week, we needed to put my sunglasses on several times. These watches shouldn't be used for telling time in this restaurant.

The restaurant is good for eating, but it(?) is destroying my vision and forcing me to shift my seating position.

Having other watches like Casioo [sic], Swatch, Fossil, and the really functional ones with calculators attached are good for the use of accessorizing, and looking good [and] would be better for this restaurant.

The VK is very thin and the Tag Heuer glare have no end before hitting me in the eyes. Restaurants that are probably having the same problem are Lavinia's, and Pat's Pizza. Other places include tables and chairs.

Wakes - I distinctly recall that you're responsible for your wake and any damage done. Has anyone ever been sited for their wake? Some of the wakes I have seen are absolutely crazy big. Thankfully, being on The Broads we have a very rocky shore and has required us to be set up for bad weather/waves.

Most of the data deals with theory and the mathematics to support it: little can be done from real-life scenarios. A lake's wave and wake patterns are too "chaotic" for such studies.

A single wake won't be returned larger from a seawall; however, multiple wakes, combined with the right wind conditions have produced some notable rogue waves. On LOTO, reports have testimony of 10 foot waves. (As does the book, "Three Centuries on Lake Winnipesaukee"). I have seen brief peaks of similar-sized wakes appearing between large speeding cruisers. You may recall my post from years ago, of having been ejected from my boat in that very circumstance.

Take a catamaran sailboat and position yourself off a Lake Winnipesaukee seawall. You'll find yourself caught up in that "standing wave" condition--which is difficult for a sailboat to break out of.

Winnipesaukee has an irregular shoreline: now consider the effect of the even more irregular shoreline at The Lake of The Ozarks (LOTO).

While the "data" is primarily anecdotal, lake veterans of 50 years have prepared YouTube videos showing how LOTO's natural cliffs and seawalls have conspired to make the lake waters even rougher. One video shows a floating gas dock--with five pumps--being tossed around!

BTW: That LOTO cruiser fatality was traced to a cruiser already having an electrical bailer problem when it was swamped from behind.

The past few years at the Village Kitchen I've seen [a loud and impassioned noise or disturbance] in Tag Heuer watches. These types of watches are a little more expensive for their size. They are made to tell accurate time for the for humans, and horses.

These watches are causing blinding glares from across the room, and over the past 4th or July week, we needed to put my sunglasses on several times. These watches shouldn't be used for telling time in this restaurant.

The restaurant is good for eating, but it(?) is destroying my vision and forcing me to shift my seating position.

Having other watches like Casioo [sic], Swatch, Fossil, and the really functional ones with calculators attached are good for the use of accessorizing, and looking good [and] would be better for this restaurant.

The VK is very thin and the Tag Heuer glare have no end before hitting me in the eyes. Restaurants that are probably having the same problem are Lavinia's, and Pat's Pizza. Other places include tables and chairs.

If you take Dante's original post and replace Wakesetter with a watch brand, it illustrates the absurdity of the argument.

My point is, it's inappropriate to demand regulation on something that can be addressed through a combination of education and preventative measures. As I've said before on here, there is a proper (and considerate) way to tow somebody behind a boat. If done correctly and in the appropriate venue for a particular sport, the resulting wake should not be a problem.

- Drive in straight lines
- Coordinate your line with other riders/skiers in the same cove/bay
- No power turns
- Wakesurf/Tube in larger bays (i.e. not Blackies)
- Stay 150' from shore (ample space for wake to dissipate)

Understand that wakeboarder's and water skiers both want calm water which is why they seek out cove's that are protected from wind. Skiers do not want a large wake. In fact, they want the flattest wake possible. Wakeboarder's use the larger wake behind a ballast filled boat to generate pop for aerial tricks, however the water still needs to be calm to hold a consistent board edge towards the wake.

To be fair, not everyone that own's a Malibu Wakesetter is an upstanding citizen who considers the impact of their actions. In fact, an argument can be made that some in that demographic can be quite inconsiderate. But, that doesn't mean all wakeboard boats should be outlawed from specific area's of the lake. If everyone is informed of proper protocol, it won't be an issue.

Also consider that people that live in Blackies may have purchased their homes for the implicit reason that it is great for skiing/wakeboarding. I know that some have mentioned in this thread that it was an outside boat that caused this issue. Tell me how would you plan to enforce a rule that disallows outside wakeboard boats from using this cove (or other similar coves for that matter) but not impede the rights of wakeboarding homeowners in said cove?

I shouldn't even be on here probably wasting my time typing this, but somebody has to provide context. The crusade continues.

If you take Dante's original post and replace Wakesetter with a watch brand, it illustrates the absurdity of the argument.

My point is, it's inappropriate to demand regulation on something that can be addressed through a combination of education and preventative measures. As I've said before on here, there is a proper (and considerate) way to tow somebody behind a boat. If done correctly and in the appropriate venue for a particular sport, the resulting wake should not be a problem.

- Drive in straight lines
- Coordinate your line with other riders/skiers in the same cove/bay
- No power turns
- Wakesurf/Tube in larger bays (i.e. not Blackies)
- Stay 150' from shore (ample space for wake to dissipate)

Understand that wakeboarder's and water skiers both want calm water which is why they seek out cove's that are protected from wind. Skiers do not want a large wake. In fact, they want the flattest wake possible. Wakeboarder's use the larger wake behind a ballast filled boat to generate pop for aerial tricks, however the water still needs to be calm to hold a consistent board edge towards the wake.

To be fair, not everyone that own's a Malibu Wakesetter is an upstanding citizen who considers the impact of their actions. In fact, an argument can be made that some in that demographic can be quite inconsiderate. But, that doesn't mean all wakeboard boats should be outlawed from specific area's of the lake. If everyone is informed of proper protocol, it won't be an issue.

Also consider that people that live in Blackies may have purchased their homes for the implicit reason that it is great for skiing/wakeboarding. I know that some have mentioned in this thread that it was an outside boat that caused this issue. Tell me how would you plan to enforce a rule that disallows outside wakeboard boats from using this cove (or other similar coves for that matter) but not impede the rights of wakeboarding homeowners in said cove?

I shouldn't even be on here probably wasting my time typing this, but somebody has to provide context. The crusade continues.

You're right--many of these boats are powered by people who are not "upstanding citizens". So please don't try to make the case that all we need to do is "inform" them.

This forum is full of threads on boat owners who remain grossly and dangerously uninformed of even the most basic safety issues, never mind detailed instructions of how to pilot a specialized craft.

So please don't try to make the case that all we need to do is "inform" them.

This forum is full of threads on boat owners who remain grossly and dangerously uninformed of even the most basic safety issues, never mind detailed instructions of how to pilot a specialized craft.

So by this logic, we should just create laws to help people who simply cannot help themselves. How depressing. Wouldn't it make more sense to direct those efforts and resources towards providing education and information rather than bury our head in the sand on every nuanced issue?

That is what is so valuable about this forum as a resource. It creates a platform to distribute awareness and information. Unfortunately, it is limited in that it probably doesn't reach the audience that needs it the most. That's where you fine folks come in. Now that you know, you can pass this information along.

So by this logic, we should just create laws to help people who simply cannot help themselves. How depressing. Wouldn't it make more sense to direct those efforts and resources towards providing education and information rather than bury our head in the sand on every nuanced issue?

I think you misunderstand me, or at least misunderstand my definition of nuanced.

There are plenty of nuanced issues discussed thoroughly on this board, such as boat operator licensing requirements, horsepower on the lake, Marine Patrol's role, etc.

I don't find any nuance in the wakeboard discussion--they are a specialty craft designed for the expressed purpose of producing an effect which we all understand is hard on other boaters, docks, and the lake shore.

So by this logic, we should just create laws to help people who simply cannot help themselves. How depressing. Wouldn't it make more sense to direct those efforts and resources towards providing education and information rather than bury our head in the sand on every nuanced issue?

This is where MP is stopping people and either educating (or issuing a verbal/written warning) and keeping records.

Quote:

That is what is so valuable about this forum as a resource. It creates a platform to distribute awareness and information. Unfortunately, it is limited in that it probably doesn't reach the audience that needs it the most. That's where you fine folks come in. Now that you know, you can pass this information along.

I understood you perfectly. However, perhaps you misunderstood me. Damaging wakes produced by wakeboard boats can be mitigated through proper technique and contentious operators. Given those factors, I do believe that is the definition of nuanced.

I absolutely agree with what I think you were getting at in your original reply. Regardless of education and information, there will always be inconsiderate people. But do you suggest we write laws to address a select few inconsiderate people at the expense of the majority?

But then you contradict your 'So please don't request' by stating, "This forum is full of threads on boat owners who remain grossly and dangerously uninformed of even the most basic safety issues"... If that is the case, then why shouldn't we try to pass along information?

Quote:

Originally Posted by PeterG

I think you misunderstand me, or at least misunderstand my definition of nuanced.

There are plenty of nuanced issues discussed thoroughly on this board, such as boat operator licensing requirements, horsepower on the lake, Marine Patrol's role, etc.

I don't find any nuance in the wakeboard discussion--they are a specialty craft designed for the expressed purpose of producing an effect which we all understand is hard on other boaters, docks, and the lake shore.

But then you contradict your 'So please don't request' by stating, "This forum is full of threads on boat owners who remain grossly and dangerously uninformed of even the most basic safety issues"... If that is the case, then why shouldn't we try to pass along information?

In general, that's a fair point. Sharing information on safe and responsible operation is an important part of this forum.

My concern is when advice on responsible operation segues into an argument that these boats can be operated broadly without significant damage to others. You've done that very artfully here, but you've neglected the underlying truth that big wakes are bad for the lake.

Thank you for everyone that has sent back information, This past week in August has been hard, my family needed to fix the dock with a winch tied up to a Pine, Every time those wake-setters come in, it pulls out dock back out to the lake, we needed to fix our dock SEVRAL TIMES A DAY, when we got here at winni for the weekend, the dock was literally about to fall off the rocks, and our two boats would be floating down the Cove with the rest of our dock, we really need to put some laws aside to make these boats have a higher radius than 150ft, more like 300ft.

Thank you for everyone that has sent back information, This past week in August has been hard, my family needed to fix the dock with a winch tied up to a Pine, Every time those wake-setters come in, it pulls out dock back out to the lake, we needed to fix our dock SEVRAL TIMES A DAY, when we got here at winni for the weekend, the dock was literally about to fall off the rocks, and our two boats would be floating down the Cove with the rest of our dock, we really need to put some laws aside to make these boats have a higher radius than 150ft, more like 300ft.

Welp - here come the fun police once again. Once people start having a bunch of fun it has to get ruined. Just realize that the laws you're now going to impose are going to take the fun of wake surfing away from youths and adults and eventually put an end to "wakesetter" boats. They're wakeboard boats btw, wakesetter is a brand made by Malibu but all of them are geared for lakes.

I really hope someone counters whatever laws you're considering and puts forth a law that makes your dock more compliant to withstand a few wakes. You own waterfront on the lake, enjoy it. I'm sure you can afford to implement a more sturdy dock rather than try to ruin the fun for others.

It does seem that 300' is a reasonable distance for wake-setters. In Winter Harbor, we can have 2 or 3 wake-setter boats at the same time, even during weekdays.

Quote:

Originally Posted by VitaBene

Sorry, I have also read Dante's posts and find them to be positive. Every boat may have its place but a boat that mainly is made to create a big wake may not be welcomed

From a long viewpoint—and from decades of direct observation—I can say that wakes in general are getting crazier! Worse, the problem is building-up on itself.

Everyone is needing a boat "two feet longer", when pontoon boats are available—roomier, watersports-friendly, speedy, handle big waves well, and are less crowded within—and which are not an affront to Winnipesaukee's disappearing shorelines.

How did we manage for decades with a 14-foot runabout?

How did we manage for decades without breakwaters, mooring whips, and hydraulic boat lifts?

➳ As usual, in shallow water, I'm holding onto my sailboat, walking it in to the dock. I glance up to see a delivery man yelling at me. I was yelling back, as crashing wakes made our discussion impossible. Using hand signals, I was able to direct the delivery items to a nearby sundeck.
We were 20-feet apart—and this was a Tuesday!

Welp - here come the fun police once again. Once people start having a bunch of fun it has to get ruined. Just realize that the laws you're now going to impose are going to take the fun of wake surfing away from youths and adults and eventually put an end to "wakesetter" boats. They're wakeboard boats btw, wakesetter is a brand made by Malibu but all of them are geared for lakes.

I really hope someone counters whatever laws you're considering and puts forth a law that makes your dock more compliant to withstand a few wakes. You own waterfront on the lake, enjoy it. I'm sure you can afford to implement a more sturdy dock rather than try to ruin the fun for others.

I'm afraid you have it backwards. Wakesetter boats have made the lake less fun for those of us who were here before their arrival.

Thank you for everyone that has sent back information, This past week in August has been hard, my family needed to fix the dock with a winch tied up to a Pine, Every time those wake-setters come in, it pulls out dock back out to the lake, we needed to fix our dock SEVRAL TIMES A DAY, when we got here at winni for the weekend, the dock was literally about to fall off the rocks, and our two boats would be floating down the Cove with the rest of our dock, we really need to put some laws aside to make these boats have a higher radius than 150ft, more like 300ft.

These boats are making a mess. Our walls are eroding, I have had broken mooring whips, broken lines, and snubbers, etc. etc. And my dock is well built. There is no reason for these boats to be in small coves. If they want waves, go to the main part of the lake away from close proximity to residences. Wonder why they do not play their "fun" games in front of their own properties or docks ? Nobody wants to take away their fun, but please be at least respectful of others. The waves are enormous. They even break over our dock and raft when the water levels are high. We have a few that come into our cove and go back and forth for the entire day.

Fortunately these boats stay away from my house because it fronts on the broads, but I did encounter one the other day in the cove by Worcester Island. I knew there would be some bounce when I crossed it's wake (I was several hundred feet past it), but I was unprepared for the size of the wave that totally overran the bow of my 16 foot boat. I can't imagine what these wakes are doing to the shoreline and docked boats in these normally quiet coves.

Welp - here come the fun police once again. Once people start having a bunch of fun it has to get ruined. Just realize that the laws you're now going to impose are going to take the fun of wake surfing away from youths and adults and eventually put an end to "wakesetter" boats. They're wakeboard boats btw, wakesetter is a brand made by Malibu but all of them are geared for lakes.

I really hope someone counters whatever laws you're considering and puts forth a law that makes your dock more compliant to withstand a few wakes. You own waterfront on the lake, enjoy it. I'm sure you can afford to implement a more sturdy dock rather than try to ruin the fun for others.

Shove your "fun police" somewhere we dont have to see it. These boats cause damage. Many drivers of these boats are selfish a-holes. There are reasons you cant do donuts anywhere you want in a monster truck in the middle of a state park, doing the same thing in a boat on a public lake should be flat outlawed.

Shove your "fun police" somewhere we dont have to see it. These boats cause damage. Many drivers of these boats are selfish a-holes. There are reasons you cant do donuts anywhere you want in a monster truck in the middle of a state park, doing the same thing in a boat on a public lake should be flat outlawed.

We've got a couple of these boats "in the hood". We're in a fairly open area and have a "U" dock set up, the big boat is four way tied with spring lines, the fun boat has spring lines and dock whips. I really don't see a lot of difference between the wakeboard boats and a larger bow rider or cruiser going by. The operators stay at least 200 plus feet off shore and it's fun to watch the kids. The radios were a bit much in past seasons but this year it seems they got the message that sound carries on the water.

We'd need to have the boats well tied regardless of whether the wakeboard boats were a thing. I personally think it's great to see kids out doing something besides tubing again. Even "in the day" (70's- 80's for me) we couldn't water ski unless it was early or later in the day when boat traffic and wakes would ease up. Can I get a " get off my lawn" anyone?

I agree with ursa, There wakes are made to pop straight up within a few feet of the boat, when I've followed them in the past I was surprised how fast they dissipated, nowhere near the wakes of cabin cruisers. Maybe some are worse than others and for sure some "captains" are more thoughtful than others. I don't own one, I would not use one in a small cove though. As with everything, The person is the problem not the weapon.

I'll agree that the difference in our location may be that the boats pass us without turning and we're not in a tight area. We get quite a few wake board boats and more conventional boats towing wake boaters passing by. The wakes are pretty similar.

Now the 40 plus foot Carver that went steaming by at 20 knots leaving a 5 foot wake last Saturday morning, you sir.....

It does seem that 300' is a reasonable distance for wake-setters. In Winter Harbor, we can have 2 or 3 wake-setter boats at the same time, even during weekdays.

From a long viewpoint—and from decades of direct observation—I can say that wakes in general are getting crazier! Worse, the problem is building-up on itself.

Everyone is needing a boat "two feet longer", when pontoon boats are available—roomier, watersports-friendly, speedy, handle big waves well, and are less crowded within—and which are not an affront to Winnipesaukee's disappearing shorelines.

How did we manage for decades with a 14-foot runabout?

How did we manage for decades without breakwaters, mooring whips, and hydraulic boat lifts?

➳ As usual, in shallow water, I'm holding onto my sailboat, walking it in to the dock. I glance up to see a delivery man yelling at me. I was yelling back, as crashing wakes made our discussion impossible. Using hand signals, I was able to direct the delivery items to a nearby sundeck.
We were 20-feet apart—and this was a Tuesday!

➳ A photographic metaphor of the lake's wake problem:

.

How did we manage for decades without the internet to constantly carp about the horrors of our privileged time we get to spend on the shores of New Hampshire's most spectacular lake?

Some people like to keep their boats on lifts. Doesn't explain much...

Winter Harbor has about six new boat lifts this summer.

I failed to note that there is a fiberglass staircase next to the boat on the lift. Let's see...raise the boat—then climb up stairs to get into it.

Before this harbor got chop-crazy with visiting funsters, we'd step from the dock to the boat. What'd we do wrong?

Quote:

Originally Posted by codeman671

Not everyone enjoys small sailboats or 14' skiffs.

Funny, in spite of scarcely any wind, I took my sailboat out this morning anyway—hoping for the best. Who should I meet after only a few hundred feet of travel, but another sailboat—just like mine?

The wake-setters weren't out yet. Do you know what happens when there's scarcely any wind, and you hit an oversized-boat wake? Right, the sailboat goes backwards. While I haven't been particularly diligent in sighting canoes—a rare sighting in these parts lately—one did hail me last weekend. He asked if he could rent my sailboat.

I later noticed a "Malibu" passing by me, at about 75' distance. A boat towing a water-skier displayed an orange flag. When they packed up for the day, they kept the orange flag raised. Another water-skier and I could have shaken hands, the skipper had passed so close! And that Malibu? It had the model name of "Wakester" on the side. It also passed very close (twice). As he left, I noticed his weight-tank was emptying from four ports—bow and stern. Docked in Miami, it would have appeared like a Caribbean Cruise boat.

Here's a thought: take a surfboard to the ocean.

My neighbor has owned a 14' "skiff" for maybe 55 years. Someday, I'll ask to tape (or chain) my video camera to the bow, and show just how violent the wakes are this season.

As for scofflaws, this harbor's most dangerous scofflaw cruised in from four miles away, and passed by at about half-throttle. Maybe it was the pieces of dimensional lumber floating in the middle of the harbor, but the two wake-setters nearby may have accidentally produced a positive outcome.

Quote:

Originally Posted by codeman671

That boat is too large to fit into that covered slip.

I'd met the previous owner as his 1960's cottage came on the market. He and I lived about one mile apart, but over 1500 miles away!

That property did eventually change ownership.

Now, that new boat being too large for the covered slip (and requiring a lift) would make my point.

Protected waters need to be protected from run-away wake destructiveness.

One of the interesting things about this thread is that there are some posters who have complained above wakesetters, and some people who have complained about people complaining.

But--unlike other posts where there are complaints about contentious issues--nobody has actually stood up and said I'm a wakesetter, and what I do does not bother others, damage boats, and erode the shoreline.

(I suppose now we'll been inundated, but I'll still think this is a really small number of people causing a significant number of headaches, and the wakesetter drivers know this.)

One of the interesting things about this thread is that there are some posters who have complained above wakesetters, and some people who have complained about people complaining.

But--unlike other posts where there are complaints about contentious issues--nobody has actually stood up and said I'm a wakesetter, and what I do does not bother others, damage boats, and erode the shoreline.

(I suppose now we'll been inundated, but I'll still think this is a really small number of people causing a significant number of headaches, and the wakesetter drivers know this.)

I am a water sports enthusiast and I am not just complaining about your complaints. I have offered viable solutions that fall on deaf ears for those who simply refuse to understand other perspectives or or lack the ability contextualize their arguments.

I understand your complaint. I appreciate and applaud your effort to bring attention to a topic that should be addressed on a public forum. I support initiatives that limit the negative impact of our activities, but we differ on the means to achieve that goal.

To be clear, I do acknowledge that wake activity does have a negative impact to the lake and homeowners property. And, it would stand to reason that a larger wake generated by a wake boat would exacerbate the problem. However, please consider that there are actions that can be taken to mitigate the problem without prohibitive regulation (as I have outlined above).

I am confident that the large and damaging wakes that you reference are generated by a wake boat that is either making a constant turn (typical of uniformed driver or someone towing a wake-surfer which in some cases requires a constant turn to sustain an appropriate curling wake required to sustain a 'surfable' wave), or a driver traveling closer than 150' from shore. Both problems can be compounded by multiple boats in a single bay or cove that have not coordinated their line.

So now, let's contextualize. I find it is a helpful tool to add perspective. The negative impact I acknowledged above is relative. I suspect that most people on this forum have a boat or home on the lake of some kind. Somewhere along the line, you have rationalized that the pollution created by your boat or the carbon footprint of your house has not negatively impacted our shared resource. I'm sure the Abenaki would beg to differ. Who are you to draw this arbitrary line in the sand? A bit hypocritical perhaps? I don't say this to be provocative, but to add context and for you to consider your argument from a broader perspective.

Speaking of drawing lines in the sand... I have a boat that offers the flexibility demanded of a multi sport enthusiast. The direct drive inboard places the engine mid-ship to evenly distribute weight for an optimal flat water skiing wake. Ballast tanks can be filled to add up to 1,500 pounds of water, and a large center mounted trim tab offers the ability to shape the wake (i.e. ramp vs. lip) for wake boarding. From the laymans perspective, my boat looks like a typical wake boat, but it is actually quite different. Would my boat be outlawed under your regulations? Is it based on how it looks or how much ballast I put in it? What if I just use half of my ballast capacity and fully engage the trim tab? My friend has a Cobalt I/O with factory ballast and a tower. His boat generates a larger wake than mine at 23mph. Uh oh, this might get complicated to enforce....

And for Pete's sake, Wakesetter is a brand within the Malibu line and not a type of boat. I suppose you can bring a horse to water but you can't make them drink.

I am a water sports enthusiast and I am not just complaining about your complaints. I have offered viable solutions that fall on deaf ears for those who simply refuse to understand other perspectives or or lack the ability contextualize their arguments.

I understand your complaint. I appreciate and applaud your effort to bring attention to a topic that should be addressed on a public forum. I support initiatives that limit the negative impact of our activities, but we differ on the means to achieve that goal.

To be clear, I do acknowledge that wake activity does have a negative impact to the lake and homeowners property. And, it would stand to reason that a larger wake generated by a wake boat would exacerbate the problem. However, please consider that there are actions that can be taken to mitigate the problem without prohibitive regulation (as I have outlined above).

I am confident that the large and damaging wakes that you reference are generated by a wake boat that is either making a constant turn (typical of uniformed driver or someone towing a wake-surfer which in some cases requires a constant turn to sustain an appropriate curling wake required to sustain a 'surfable' wave), or a driver traveling closer than 150' from shore. Both problems can be compounded by multiple boats in a single bay or cove that have not coordinated their line.

So now, let's contextualize. I find it is a helpful tool to add perspective. The negative impact I acknowledged above is relative. I suspect that most people on this forum have a boat or home on the lake of some kind. Somewhere along the line, you have rationalized that the pollution created by your boat or the carbon footprint of your house has not negatively impacted our shared resource. I'm sure the Abenaki would beg to differ. Who are you to draw this arbitrary line in the sand? A bit hypocritical perhaps? I don't say this to be provocative, but to add context and for you to consider your argument from a broader perspective.

Speaking of drawing lines in the sand... I have a boat that offers the flexibility demanded of a multi sport enthusiast. The direct drive inboard places the engine mid-ship to evenly distribute weight for an optimal flat water skiing wake. Ballast tanks can be filled to add up to 1,500 pounds of water, and a large center mounted trim tab offers the ability to shape the wake (i.e. ramp vs. lip) for wake boarding. From the laymans perspective, my boat looks like a typical wake boat, but it is actually quite different. Would my boat be outlawed under your regulations? Is it based on how it looks or how much ballast I put in it? What if I just use half of my ballast capacity and fully engage the trim tab? My friend has a Cobalt I/O with factory ballast and a tower. His boat generates a larger wake than mine at 23mph. Uh oh, this might get complicated to enforce....

And for Pete's sake, Wakesetter is a brand within the Malibu line and not a type of boat. I suppose you can bring a horse to water but you can't make them drink.

I agree with most of what you've written here.

Most significantly, your message does acknowledge that many of these boats are leaving large destructive wakes, and that the only way to tow a surfer is with a large destructive wake.

Also, the solutions you offer are not for the complainers, but for those driving these boats. I appreciate that, and I hope these pilots learn, and that they stop towing surfers. It's their ears you need to reach.

I agree with most of what you've written here. Most significantly, your message does acknowledge that many of these boats are leaving large destructive wakes, and that the only way to tow a surfer is with a large destructive wake. Also, the solutions you offer are not for the complainers, but for those driving these boats. I appreciate that, and I hope these pilots learn, and that they stop towing surfers. It's their ears you need to reach.

In the chart below, which designates shoreline areas where breakwaters may be placed, a "o" indicates the shoreline of Rattlesnake Island, whose integrity is obviously impacted by destructive erosion.

An "x" indicates Winter Harbor, which has seen a huge increase of breakwaters—and boatlifts—sometimes both!That increase corresponds with the proliferation of wake-setter boats.

Seemingly, the State has surrendered its shorelines and water quality—rather than tackle the problem directly.

I own one these wakeboard boats, a neighbor of mine a few houses down has one too and we primarily use them in the bay that I/we own lakefront property on. I also see lots of boats pulling tubes and skiers. Our boats do generate large wakes behind the boat but by the time it makes it to shore, it pretty much dissipates and is no more than any other boat of the same size and is minimal. How about a day like today that there's 11 mph winds and whitecaps on the lake for the next 12 hours.. constant white caps... let's complain about Mother Nature.. Maybe the complainers are also the people that complain about global warming... You can't compare the small ripples that our boats make at the shore if you look at the constant crashing from other nature. Please let's find something else to be miserable about. BTW, we recently bought our property, brought our wakeboat along with us and made friends with more than half the people in our bay after we are "destroying" everyone's shoreline... Apparently it's not as big of a problem as everyone thinks it is.

I own one these wakeboard boats, a neighbor of mine a few houses down has one too and we primarily use them in the bay that I/we own lakefront property on. I also see lots of boats pulling tubes and skiers. Our boats do generate large wakes behind the boat but by the time it makes it to shore, it pretty much dissipates and is no more than any other boat of the same size and is minimal. How about a day like today that there's 11 mph winds and whitecaps on the lake for the next 12 hours.. constant white caps... let's complain about Mother Nature.. Maybe the complainers are also the people that complain about global warming... You can't compare the small ripples that our boats make at the shore if you look at the constant crashing from other nature. Please let's find something else to be miserable about. BTW, we recently bought our property, brought our wakeboat along with us and made friends with more than half the people in our bay after we are "destroying" everyone's shoreline... Apparently it's not as big of a problem as everyone thinks it is.

When any boat passes by and it's wake hits your shore, it is over pretty quickly.

When the operator of the "make a big wake" boats decides that the water in the area of your house is the place his family wants to wake board then your shoreline may be subjected to hours of big waves as everyone in the family has their turn, falls, and has their turn again.

I have not noticed, as claimed by some, that the wakes dissipate quickly. Last week I had to make substantial repairs to my granite seawall that had been damaged by the repeated wakes hitting it.

And that doesn't address the hours of loud music that accompany these boats. At times, on otherwise nice days, when one of these boats is playing in my area, I have had to shut the windows in my house just so we can converse or watch TV. The speakers on the towers are placed to broadcast the music across the lake thus annoying a substantial number of people from the mainland to the islands.

If the music is that important to the enjoyment of the person in the water how about a waterproof headset so they get their choice of music and the rest of the people attempting to enjoy the lake are not disturbed?

And that doesn't address the hours of loud music that accompany these boats. At times, on otherwise nice days, when one of these boats is playing in my area, I have had to shut the windows in my house just so we can converse or watch TV. The speakers on the towers are placed to broadcast the music across the lake thus annoying a substantial number of people from the mainland to the islands.

If the music is that important to the enjoyment of the person in the water how about a waterproof headset so they get their choice of music and the rest of the people attempting to enjoy the lake are not disturbed?